Chun-Ru Chien

The utility of neoadjuvant radiotherapy for patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (LA-ESCC) receiving preoperative systemic treatment remains a subject of ongoing debate. In this population-based cohort study, we screened for LA-ESCC cases diagnosed over 2011-2022 using data from the Taiwan Cancer Registry. We utilized the target trial emulation (TTE) framework, employing propensity score weighting (PSW) to mitigate the effects of observed confounding variables. We then compared the hazard ratio (HR) of death between the neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (nCCRT) group and the neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) group. Additionally, a comprehensive assessment of other outcomes and extensive supplementary analyses were performed. The primary analysis included 2069 patients. Overall survival was not significantly different between the nCCRT and nCT groups, with a PSW-adjusted HR of 0.82 (95% confidence interval=0.52-1.28; p=0.62). Similar results were found for other endpoints, although the pathological complete response rate was higher in the nCCRT group. The results remained similar in the supplementary analyses. In this population-based TTE study, the overall survival of LA-ESCC patients treated with nCCRT was not significantly different from that of patients treated with nCT.

Background The role of radiation therapy in combination with systemic treatment for stage IVb esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is unclear. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of primary chemoradiotherapy for these patients and compare it to that chemotherapy alone. Materials and methods In this retrospective cohort study, we adopted a target trial emulation framework to identify eligible patients in the Taiwan Cancer Registry diagnosed between 2011 and 2021. In the primary analysis, overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint, whereas the incidence of esophageal cancer mortality was the secondary endpoint. Extensive supplementary analyses were also conducted. Results We included 5294 patients in the primary analysis and found that OS was significantly better for those treated with chemoradiotherapy (n = 5065) than for those treated with chemotherapy only (n = 229). The propensity score weighting adjusted hazard ratio of death was 0.46 (95% confidence interval 0.41–0.52, p < 0.0001). The secondary endpoint and supplementary analyses also favored the chemoradiotherapy group. Conclusion The OS of stage IVb ESCC patients treated with chemoradiotherapy was significantly better than that of patients treated with chemotherapy alone. The results of relevant ongoing clinical trials are eagerly awaited.

Background/Aim: Definitive radiotherapy is the main treatment modality for patients with locally advanced stage lung cancer and a good performance status who are ineligible for surgery. Respiration-controlled radiotherapy (RCRT) has been recommended, but its effectiveness has been debated in the literature. Therefore, we aimed to study the efficacy of RCRT in definitive radiotherapy for locally advanced-stage lung cancer. Patients and Methods: We identified lung cancer patients diagnosed between 2011 and 2021 using data from the Taiwan Cancer Registry and related databases. In our primary analysis, we applied propensity score weighting (PSW) to balance observable potential confounders. We then compared the hazard ratio (HR) of death between the RCRT group and the non-RCRT group. Additionally, we conducted a comprehensive assessment of other outcomes and performed various supplementary analyses. Results: The primary analysis included 3,020 patients. Overall survival did not significantly differ between the RCRT group and the non-RCRT group, with a PSW-adjusted HR of 0.79 (95% confidence interval=0.49-1.28, p=0.342). These findings were consistent with other outcomes and supplementary analyses. Conclusion: In locally advanced-stage lung cancer patients who received definitive radiotherapy, survival did not significantly differ between those treated with RCRT and those treated without RCRT. To our knowledge, this is the first population-based study on this topic.

Introduction: The use of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) over conventional fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) for early‐stage non‐small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been advocated, but is also debated in the literature.Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we adopted a target trial emulation framework to identify eligible patients diagnosed between 2011 and 2021 using the Taiwan Cancer Registry. In the primary analysis, the overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint, whereas incidences of lung cancer mortality and radiation pulmonary toxicity were the secondary endpoints. Extensive supplementary analyses were also conducted.Results: We included 351 patients in the primary analysis and found that the OS was not significantly different between the SABR (n = 290) and CFRT (n = 61) groups. The propensity score weighting adjusted hazard ratio of death was 0.75 (95% confidence interval 0.53–1.07, p = 0.118). The secondary endpoints and supplementary analyses showed no significant differences.Conclusions: The OS of patients with early‐stage NSCLC treated with SABR was not significantly different from that of patients treated with CFRT alone. The results of the relevant ongoing clinical trials are eagerly awaited.

Background. The effectiveness of definitive radiotherapy (RT) for patients with clinical stage IIIB or IIIC lung adenocarcinoma and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations who received first- or second-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) is unclear. Methods. Taiwan Cancer Registry data were used in this retrospective cohort study to identify adult patients diagnosed with EGFR-mutated stage IIIB or IIIC lung adenocarcinoma between 2011 and 2020. Patients treated with first- or second-generation EGFR TKIs were classified into RT and non-RT groups. Propensity score (PS) weighting was applied to balance covariates between groups. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and the incidence of lung cancer mortality (ILCM) was considered as a supplementary outcome. Additional supplementary analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the findings. Results. Among 270 eligible patients, 41 received RT and 229 did not. After a median follow-up of 46 months, PS-weighted analysis showed the PS-weighted hazard ratio of death for the RT group compared to the non-RT group was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.61–1.45, ). ILCM rates did not differ significantly between the two groups. Supplementary analyses yielded consistent results. Conclusion. The addition of definitive RT to first- or second-generation EGFR TKI treatment does not significantly improve OS of patients with EGFR-mutated stage IIIB or IIIC lung adenocarcinoma. NCT03521154 NCT05167851.

The efficacy of pelvic radiation in the management of locally advanced stage rectal cancer has come under scrutiny in the context of modern precision medicine and systemic therapy as evidenced by recent clinical trials such as FOWARC (J Clin Oncol 2019; 37: 3223-3233), NCT04165772 (N Engl J Med 2022; 386: 2363-2376), and PROSPECT (N Engl J Med 2023; 389: 322-334). In this review, we comprehensively assess these pivotal trials and offer additional insights into the evolving role of pelvic radiation in contemporary oncology.

Background/Aim: The role of neoadjuvant radiotherapy in the management of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) who have undergone neoadjuvant systemic therapy has been the subject of recent debate. Patients and Methods: We identified eligible rectal cancer patients diagnosed between 2011 and 2020 using data from the Taiwan Cancer Registry. In our primary analysis, we applied propensity score weighting (PSW) to balance observable potential confounders. We then compared the hazard ratio (HR) of death the neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (nCCRT) group and the neoadjuvant chemotherapy without radiotherapy (nCT) group. Additionally, we conducted a comprehensive assessment of other outcomes and performed various supplementary analyses. Results: The primary analysis included 2,298 patients. The overall survival did not exhibit statistically significant differences, with a PSW-adjusted HR of 0.72 (95% confidence interval=0.33-1.56, p=0.40) when comparing the nCCRT group to the nCT group. These findings were consistent with those of other long-term outcomes and supplementary analyses. Conclusion: In patients with LARC who have undergone neoadjuvant systemic therapy, the addition of radiotherapy did not yield statistically significant differences in long-term clinical outcomes.

Background/Aim: The effect of pelvic neoadjuvant radiotherapy (nRT) for stage M1a rectal adenocarcinoma patients treated with systemic therapy followed by proctectomy and metastasectomy was scarcely investigated in the literatures. Patients and Methods: The eligible rectal cancer patients diagnosed between 2011-2019 were identified via the Taiwan Cancer Registry. In the primary analysis, we used propensity score weighting to balance observable potential confounders and compared the hazard ratio (HR) of death for the nRT group vs. without RT group. We also compared the incidence of rectal cancer mortality (IRCM) and performed various supplementary analyses. Results: Our primary analyses included 145 patients. nRT was associated with improved OS (HR=0.51, p=0.01). The numerical trends remained similar for IRCM and in supplementary analyses. Conclusion: nRT was associated with improved OS in our study population.

Background: To our knowledge, there have been no systematic reviews of health economic evaluations of proton therapy specific to lung cancer. Methods: We conducted this systematic review according to the predefined protocol [PROSPERO CRD42022365869]. We summarized the results of the included studies via structured narrative synthesis. Results: We identified four studies (all used passively scattered proton therapy) from 787 searches. Two cost analyses reported that proton therapy was more costly than photon therapy for early- or locally advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer, one cost-utility analysis reported that proton therapy was dominated by nonproton therapy in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer, and one cost-utility analysis reported that proton therapy was not cost-effective (vs. photon) in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Conclusions: Passively scattered proton therapy was more costly and not cost-effective than photon therapy for early- and locally advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer. Further health economic evaluations regarding modern proton therapy (such as scanning beam) for common radiotherapy indications of lung cancer are eagerly awaited.